Mr. Speaker, I will take that question because I recently had experience with those laws. I can tell the member we do respect them. Patents are a way to reward and encourage innovation.

This week we sat down with the patent holder, Bayer, and we resolved the matter. We resolved it on a basis that is good for Canadians because we got access to the drugs we need at preferred prices. We did not spend a nickel more than we had to in order to achieve that.

The member should know that we do respect patent laws. We also respect the need to protect the health of Canadian.

Mr. Speaker, the reality is that the government did not respect the patent laws.

The Minister of Health has defended his actions by arguing against the bottom line. The reality is that both the generic and the brand name pharmaceutical companies are large scale business operations. Both need clear legal guidelines to invest in Canada and provide Canadians with drugs to address their medical needs.

Mr. Speaker, the member should know that we took steps to make sure the health of Canadians was protected.

When the patent was an issue we met with the patent holder and resolved the matter with them through agreement. However what was really at issue this past week was not so much the patent law. The issue in this episode was if we were in a position to respond to protecting the health of Canadians should something happen. We are in a position to do so.

Mr. Speaker, everyone knows that panic is not the best policy, as evidenced this week by the actions of the Minister of Health. It is in emergency situations and in crises that democratic controls are most necessary.

Can the Deputy Prime Minister assure us that, as a minimum, his government will pledge to include sunset clauses in its anti-terrorism bill?

Stephen OwenParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member brings up a good point and that is the advice coming from the Senate and the House committees looking into Bill C-36. The Prime Minister and the Minister of Justice have said in the House repeatedly that the government, while it has put forward preferred options, is willing to consider all reasonable advice coming from those committees.

Mr. Speaker, first the solicitor general claims the RCMP and CSIS are adequately funded and staffed. Then he jumps on his soapbox explaining why there is a need to throw more money into the security forces. The fact is he is the one who gutted them in the first place. Now police and CSIS investigations are being sidelined because the RCMP does not have enough manpower.

Will the solicitor general stop playing a shell game with the RCMP and immediately ensure that it has adequate personnel so nothing is put on the back burner?

Mr. Speaker, as I have said many times in the House, the government provided in the last budget and since the last budget about $2 billion to the public safety envelope for the security of this nation.

In the last couple of weeks we provided about $100 million extra for police and security intelligence. We have a public safety committee in place to make sure that if any more funds or any more technology are needed it will be provided.

Mr. Speaker, the minister talks about the money that was put in since the budget. The budget was so long ago, we cannot remember.

SIRC reports that CSIS is so overloaded with work that it can take years to determine if potential newcomers to our country pose a security threat. This was occurring long before September 11. Since then its workload has increased dramatically.

Again, I ask the solicitor general this. When will CSIS receive the necessary funding to hire more agents so no one slips into this country who poses a threat to the safety and security of Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, I think my hon. colleague is well aware that the director of CSIS has said many times that he has the financial resources to fulfill his mandate. In fact, just a week ago we provided another $10 million in that area.

I am aware there was a backlog in dealing with immigration screening. However I can tell my hon. colleague that that backlog has been cleaned up.

Mr. Speaker, it is true that we made great strides in Bonn, and I congratulate the Deputy Prime Minister, the hon. member for Windsor West, on his success.

However the Government of Canada cannot act without the support of the provinces and without consulting them. We want the broadest consultations possible with all sectors, including the provinces, before deciding whether Canada should ratify the protocol.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to inform the member that Quebec's minister of the environment has supported the position of Ontario and Alberta that more consultations with the provinces are needed before the protocol can be ratified. This was just one week ago, the resolution of the National Assembly of Quebec notwithstanding.